What's Lance Armstrong's legacy, now that he has given up his fight against the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency on allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs? Some say his decision to end the battle amounts to an admission of guilt. Others blame USADA for pursuing Armstrong and ruling against him despite his having passed hundreds of doping tests. Many others say his fight against cancer is more important than whether or not he used PEDs. What's your take on Lance Armstrong now?

BOSTON7066: "Lance Armstrong may have doped, he may have not. Either way, I'd really like to see the proof the USDA had to push Lance to make the decision he made. It would really violate the American idea of considering people innocent until proven guilty to convict without proof. Here's hoping Lance does as he says and rededicates himself to his cancer foundation, regardless of whether he's banned from cycling or stripped of his Tour titles."

garygilltwo: "Testimony by coercion and no physical evidence is problematic in a court of law. The DOJ figured that one out eventually and dropped their alleged case against Lance. But the US Anti-Doping Agency is a regulatory body that is not confined by the law other than it's own until brought before a court of law. That should be Lance's next step and win this dang thing once and for all in court. For those of you who have never been attacked by a regulatory body you have no clue on the exasperation you feel defending yourself against bloated versions of importance that regulators think they are. You wait until they are done and then go to court to get your justice. Good luck Lance. "

DeadBodyMan609: "he dominated the dirtiest sport in the world and you expect me to buy that he didnt take anything"

Yacionaboat: "Disgusting. Over 500 passed drug tests. Investigations by the FDA, FBI, USADA, and others. Nothing to speak of. A couple people with sour grapes with ZERO credibility (Hello Landis) say something and you strip him? Since when is proof not needed in this country?"

WithReason13: "I REALLY wanted to believe that Lance wasn't a doper. But in a sport where probably >80% of the athletes are doping, for him to win 7 in a row, against other convicted dopers mind you, to think he wasn't part of the game is just naive. That being said, I don't think he should be stripped of anything, because like I said, all his competitors were doing the same thing. There is a reason why they test those guys EVERY DAY during the Tour de France. Because they know they all cheat..."

TheReaper812: "The USADA will have to release evidence. Considering the public outrcy, they will have to. My question now is if the USADA does present solid and HARD evidence that Lance did dope, will people be able to look past all the good Lance did against Cancer and consider the evidence? He'll always be revered for his stand against Cancer and none can take that away from him, but if he did cheat, let's not sweep that under the rug."

hidinginsight: "For years, he hasn't merely maintained his innocence, he's shouted down everyone else at every turn who even remotely insinuated otherwise. It's gone on for many, many years. And now, all he has to say is "Enough is enough" and that the USADA charges are "pitiful", yet he's walking away with only a press release to hold up his reputation? There's a small chance he's actually sick and tired of it all, but really, in the absence of any attempt at defending himself against what is a reputation-destroying device, could it be this time there's actually more than just smoke here than he wants made known in public?"

airforcefoo: "While this doesn't look good for Lance's innocence, it is definitely a witch hunt. If Lance was a retired domestique, would the USADA be going after him, and then issue him a lifetime ban when the standard doping band in cycling is two years? Also, why did all these witnesses feel compelled to testify in this case after several years and investigations of silence?"